If I had my druthers.. I would design a team in the model of a balanced team. Probably even run first, however the current NFL rules would sway that. If you can effectively run the ball, you control the game. If you have a QB worth his salt, he is going to find success in the passing game with an effective running game behind him.

Basically you dictate to opposition and that carries over into the defense as well.

Trying to pass first allows the defense to sort of dictate to you, you are going to take what they give you in coverage. That is not how I want a football team to be modeled.. I want that control. I want to dictate pace, the emotions and the clock of that game.

A locker room is a funny place, a bunch of hyper and testosterone flowing guys that feed off emotion of the game. The big hits.. the small victories within a game. There is nothing like punching the rock down someones throat and them looking at you like there is nothing they can do. Whipped. I have been on both sides of that coin at the lower levels.. there is nothing like that natural high.

I truly believe that is why we seem to play to the level of the competition often and at times (lately most of the time) seem to lack fire. We are a opportunistic type team in place of a dictating type team. We don't take what we want.. we take the path of least resistance.

Balance gives you more room for error, and in the NFL, every little edge or play may mean a win or a loss.

That was palpable in last night's HOU v. NYJ game. HOU forced their will on the Jets. Beat them down with the run. The Jets D looked completely gassed. For the Packers, the beauty is that we have the talent to throw down in similar fashion. Mike just needs to call it. I think our passing attack would become way more potent as a result, and our D would benefit from less reps.

HOU's D has the fewest reps in the NFL. No wonder they are rated #3 overall, behind only SEA and SF, two more teams who have no problems calling 32+ attempts per game - that is their average attempts. All of them. HOU #2 rushing. SEA #4. SF #6.

That was palpable in last night's HOU v. NYJ game. HOU forced their will on the Jets. Beat them down with the run. The Jets D looked completely gassed. For the Packers, the beauty is that we have the talent to throw down in similar fashion. Mike just needs to call it. I think our passing attack would become way more potent as a result, and our D would benefit from less reps.

HOU's D has the fewest reps in the NFL. No wonder they are rated #3 overall, behind only SEA and SF, two more teams who have no problems calling 32+ attempts per game - that is their average attempts. All of them. HOU #2 rushing. SEA #4. SF #6.

What I liked about Houston's offense was the mix of plays. They'd run the ball out of a running formation (rather than a draw out of the shotgun), then follow it up with a play-action pass. Because of the run, the LBs had to honor the run threat, couldn't just drop back in zone, and the middle of the field was open for the pass. Next play another run from the I, followed by another play-action pass. As a result, Hou is dominating time of possession 60-40%.
Mike McCarthy too many times has pretty much abandoned that type of game plan. I just hope Mike McCarthy is paying attention as he watches the Hou-Jets film to get ready for this week's game.

So on another board.. in the same type of argument we have been wagering for some time, with Zombie finally conceding I may add (lol), I took it to task to look at the Rodgers tenure in numbers when we run more than 20 times vs less than 20 times a game.

In almost every case, running the ball has a positive effect on the team. From sacks to defense to yard per pass attempt, all for the sacrifice of 1.55 pass attempts a game.

The winning percentage looks at only those amount of games, IE when we rush more than 20 times, we win 80% of those games.

Damn auto sizing.. lol... attached the image.

Pack93z attached the following image(s):

PassVSRun.png (8kb) downloaded 40 time(s).

You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

Pack - I had a bunch of arguments:1) Elite RBs are actually bad because they take money from other areas,2) Rushing success has no bearing on a team's success,3) Pass/run %

I didn't "concede" anything. I admit when I'm wrong. I was right about 1 and 2 and wrong about 3. I thought we could go more gung ho on pass %, but found the sweet spot is less than I thought, more high 50s than 65% which I wanted.

I know you just like to ruffle my feathers, but come on. Most of my arguments about running have been correct, and the NFL knows it. follows #1 and I bet you had I told him these 3 arguments 2 or 3 years ago back when I was making it, if it was behind closed doors, he'd agree with #1 and most likely #2.

And you all have to admit that not only is a pass first coach (despite what he tells the media), it generally works. If we become a team that runs in the 50s, we will lose. That crap doesn't work in today's NFL.

So if anything, I was WAY ahead of all of you because I said this years ago.

"Success" I feel is a relative term. Rushing Yards holds little to no bearing on winning is what I believe to be accurate. Rushing Attempts gaining any positive yards consistently I would have to imagine has a positive impact on the Passing game. Which in turn assists a higher Offensive QB Rating, which I believe Offensive / Defensive QB Rating differential holds a very direct bearing on winning/losing games.

Truth be told, there is no script to winning, other than scoring more points than the other team. If there were such a script, I can think of 32 teams that would be using it in the NFL, thus, nullifying said script's value.

I maintain as I said several times, pass 60, run 40 in terms of percentage yields the best outcome as it keeps the defense more honest than say 70/30 ratio.

"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

"Success" I feel is a relative term. Rushing Yards holds little to no bearing on winning is what I believe to be accurate. Rushing Attempts gaining any positive yards consistently I would have to imagine has a positive impact on the Passing game. Which in turn assists a higher Offensive QB Rating, which I believe Offensive / Defensive QB Rating differential holds a very direct bearing on winning/losing games.

Truth be told, there is no script to winning, other than scoring more points than the other team. If there were such a script, I can think of 32 teams that would be using it in the NFL, thus, nullifying said script's value.

I maintain as I said several times, pass 60, run 40 in terms of percentage yields the best outcome as it keeps the defense more honest than say 70/30 ratio.

Yes, that's about right. And no, there is no script. But if you're a run, run, pass, punt team, you won't get far in today's NFL.

Now, this is ONLY one game, but if you look at GB vs Houston, we were definitely a pass first team and it worked. 37 passes vs 33 rushes was deceptive. called mostly pass plays until the game was completely sealed.

When we were up 35-17, had called (assuming Mike calls the plays and given that Aaron is allowed to change them at the line) 35 passes vs 21 rushes. The last 4 drives were just rushes (with 2 passes thrown in there) to eat the clock.

So it's obvious that in this specific game, going pass first worked. And this is credit that Pack93z fails to give me and . I've said since 2007 that calls a game pretty much how I would have called it. He has become my favorite Packers coach that I've ever watched. By far. And that includes Mike Holmgren.

As for the word success, it only means one thing to me - winning SBs. Everything short of winning a SB is a less than successful season. We're the Packers, not the Vikings.

I think it's more like 41 pass plays and 29 rush plays. I don't think the two runs by Aaron Rodgers were designed runs, and the two sacks were passing plays. One of Rodgers rushes were on a 3rd and 1, could be a run play??? 40 30?

58.6% pass41.4% run

awfully close to my 60/40 ratio target

Packers actually lost time of possession in this game by 5 minutes too.

"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

I think it's more like 41 pass plays and 29 rush plays. I don't think the two runs by Aaron Rodgers were designed runs, and the two sacks were passing plays. One of Rodgers rushes were on a 3rd and 1, could be a run play??? 40 30?

58.6% pass41.4% run

awfully close to my 60/40 ratio target

Packers actually lost time of possession in this game by 5 minutes too.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.